GeorgeD200
Forum Enthusiast
Some people would complain if they were hung with a new rope.
In case you live under a rock, you've seen the maxed-out threads about how crazy/naive/ insane Nikon is for pricing the D3x at $8000 USD. Posters have threatened to switch to Sony, Canon, give up photography altogether, etc.
Two words: Stop Whining.
For years people have whined about Nikon not having full frame. Then when the D3 came out, they whined that it was only 12MP (and $5000). Now Nikon finally comes out with a true pro-level camera that competes with or exceeds Canon Mark III on every level (at least on paper, nobody's actually seen one yet), and they're still not happy. The Mark III, now about 1 year old, debut price was $7999.99. And people paid it. Sure economic times were better a year ago, but so what? Times change.
Nikon would be idiots NOT to debut the D3x at $8000. Why? Because people will pay it. And when the first wave of gotta-have-it-no-matter-what-it-costs people are done, they'll lower the price. The B&H price on the Mark III is now $6700. That's about a 16% price drop in one year. I'd expect a similar price drop for the D3x over the course of the next year.
A lot of the anger is probably fueled by rumors that the D3x would be $5000. I'm sure that did cause some disappointment, but let's think about this. Why would Nikon put out a Mark III killer for $1700 less than a Mark III? THAT would be idiocy, at least until Canon comes out with the Mark IV. Besides, how can you sell existing stock of D3 for $4000, when you've got a camera with twice the MP for $5000? It's hard enough to sell the D3 with the D700 lurking about at $2700.
Let's look at the bright side. It hasn't been since I-can't-remember-when that Nikon had the TOP Pro-level DSLR on the planet (don't post and tell me you're Olympus/Sony/Panasonic/Hasselblad is better, I don't care). It's not a Sony sensor (we should all be happy about that), and it's better than the best Canon has to offer, again based on pre-release data at the present time.
Take a moment to bask in the all-too-brief glory as the King of the Mountain, someone will knock us off it all too soon.
BTW, I can't even afford a D700, so I feel your economic pain. I do. But let's try to be rational, not emotional here. Besides, maybe this will drive prices down all down the line. I'd love to see a D700 around $2000.
Please don't post just to tell me what an idiot I am. I just thought with all the negativity about this issue, someone needed to point out that Nikon deserves congrats here, not grumbling.
JMHO
In case you live under a rock, you've seen the maxed-out threads about how crazy/naive/ insane Nikon is for pricing the D3x at $8000 USD. Posters have threatened to switch to Sony, Canon, give up photography altogether, etc.
Two words: Stop Whining.
For years people have whined about Nikon not having full frame. Then when the D3 came out, they whined that it was only 12MP (and $5000). Now Nikon finally comes out with a true pro-level camera that competes with or exceeds Canon Mark III on every level (at least on paper, nobody's actually seen one yet), and they're still not happy. The Mark III, now about 1 year old, debut price was $7999.99. And people paid it. Sure economic times were better a year ago, but so what? Times change.
Nikon would be idiots NOT to debut the D3x at $8000. Why? Because people will pay it. And when the first wave of gotta-have-it-no-matter-what-it-costs people are done, they'll lower the price. The B&H price on the Mark III is now $6700. That's about a 16% price drop in one year. I'd expect a similar price drop for the D3x over the course of the next year.
A lot of the anger is probably fueled by rumors that the D3x would be $5000. I'm sure that did cause some disappointment, but let's think about this. Why would Nikon put out a Mark III killer for $1700 less than a Mark III? THAT would be idiocy, at least until Canon comes out with the Mark IV. Besides, how can you sell existing stock of D3 for $4000, when you've got a camera with twice the MP for $5000? It's hard enough to sell the D3 with the D700 lurking about at $2700.
Let's look at the bright side. It hasn't been since I-can't-remember-when that Nikon had the TOP Pro-level DSLR on the planet (don't post and tell me you're Olympus/Sony/Panasonic/Hasselblad is better, I don't care). It's not a Sony sensor (we should all be happy about that), and it's better than the best Canon has to offer, again based on pre-release data at the present time.
Take a moment to bask in the all-too-brief glory as the King of the Mountain, someone will knock us off it all too soon.
BTW, I can't even afford a D700, so I feel your economic pain. I do. But let's try to be rational, not emotional here. Besides, maybe this will drive prices down all down the line. I'd love to see a D700 around $2000.
Please don't post just to tell me what an idiot I am. I just thought with all the negativity about this issue, someone needed to point out that Nikon deserves congrats here, not grumbling.
JMHO
